Biocompatibility and biodegradability of spider egg sac silk
- 316 Downloads
- 28 Citations
Abstract
Spider egg sac silk (SpESS) were enzymatically cleaned and their biodegradation in vivo and in vitro, as well as their biocompatibility were studied. Proteinase K treatment diminished the tenacity and the strain of the SpESS fibers in proportion to the enzyme concentration. Fibers treated with trypsin were not significantly affected. Tensile properties of Vicryl®, SpESS and of silkworm (Bombyx mori) silk fibers (SWS) were measured after incubation in phosphate buffered saline (PBS) at 37 °C up to 12 weeks. Biodegradation of SpESS and SWS was insignificant compared to Vicryl®. Five milligram SpESS fibers from laboratory grown spiders (Araneus diadematus) were treated with proteinases before sterilization and subcutaneously implanted in Wistar rats. After 1, 4 and 7 weeks the immunological reaction was compared to untreated SpESS and polyglactin (Vicryl®) control samples. SpESS samples treated with trypsin only or in combination with a Proteinase K treatment induced less inflammatory reactions than untreated silk fibers. The enzymatical cleaning could diminish the tensile properties, but enhanced the biocompatibility of the SpESS fibers rendering them appropriate for use in biomaterial application where the slow biodegradability is an advantage.
Keywords
Giant Cell Linear Density Silk Fiber Spider Silk Dragline SilkNotes
Acknowledgement
This research is funded by the BOF (special research funds) of the Ghent University (B/03191/02 IV1). PCM Verdonk is a research assistant for the Fund for Scientific Research Flanders (FWO Belgium).
References
- 1.F. VOLLRATH, Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 24 (1999) 81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.B. MADSEN and F. VOLLRATH, Naturwissenschaften 87 (2000) 148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.C. Y. HAYASHI, N. H. SHIPLEY and R. V. LEWIS, Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 24 (1999) 271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.F. VOLLRATH, J. Biotechnol. 74 (2000) 67Google Scholar
- 5.S. KUBIK, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 41 (2002) 2721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.S. R. FAHNESTOCK, Z. YAO and L. A. BEDZYK, J. Biotechnol. 74 (2000) 105 Google Scholar
- 7.D. HUEMMERICH, T. SCHEIBEL, F. VOLLRATH, S. COHEN, U. GAT and S. ITTAH, Curr. Biol. 14 (2004) 2070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.J. SCHELLER, K. H. GUHRS, F. GROSSE and U. CONRAD, Nat. Biotechnol. 19 (2001) 573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.A. LAZARIS, S. ARCIDIACONO, Y. HUANG, F. DUGUAY, N. CHRETIEN, E. A. WELSH, J. W. SOARES, C. N. KARATZAS, Science 295 (2002) 472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.F. VOLLRATH and D. P. KNIGHT, Nature 410 (2001) 541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.C. VINEY, J. Tex. Inst. 91 (2000) 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.D. W. HUTMACHER, Biomaterials 21 (2000) 2529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.L. LU, X. ZHU, R. G. VALENZUELA, B. L. CURRIER and M. J. YASZEMSKI, Clin. Orthop. 391 (2001) S251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.G. H. ALTMAN, R. L. HORAN, H. H. LU, J. MOREAU, I. MARTIN, J. C. RICHMOND and D. L. KAPLAN, Biomaterials 23 (2002) 4131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.S. SOFIA, M. B. MCCARTHY, G. GRONOWISC and D. L. KAPLAN, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 54 (2001) 139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.F. VOLLRATH, P. BARTH, A. BASEDOW, W. ENGSTROM and H. LIST, In vivo 16 (2002) 229Google Scholar
- 17.E. VAN NIMMEN, P. KIEKENS and J. MERTENS, J. Mater. Prod. Technol. 18 (2003) 345Google Scholar
- 18.J. M. GOSLINE, P. A. GUERETTE, C. S. ORTLEPP and K. N. SAVAGE, J. Exp. Biol. 202 (1999) 3295Google Scholar
- 19.ISO 10993-6: Biological evaluation of medical devices–Part 6: Tests for local effects after implantation (1994)Google Scholar
- 20.R. W. POSTLETHWAIT, D. A. WILIGAN and A. W. ULIN, Ann. Surg. 181 (1975) 144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.W. A. CASTELLI, C. E. NASJELTI, R. E. CAFFESSE and R. DIAZ-PEREZ, Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. 45 (1978) 179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.C. R. UFF, A. D. SCOTT, A. G. POCKLEY and R. K. PHILLIPS, Biomaterials 16 (1995) 355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.B. PANILAITIS, G. H. ALTMAN, J. CHEN, H. J. JIN, V. KARAGEORGIOU and D. L. KAPLAN, Biomaterials 24 (2003) 3079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.M. SANTIN, A. MOTTA, G. FREDDI and M. CANNAS, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 46 (1999) 382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.G. H. ALTMAN, F. DIAZ, C. JAKUBA, T. CALABRO, R. L. HORAN, J. CHEN, H. LU, J. RICHMOND and D. L. KAPLAN, Biomaterials 24 (2003) 401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.G. FREDDI, R. MOSSOTTI and R. INNOCENTI, J. Biotechnol. 106 (2003) 101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.T. GHEYSENS, L. BELADJAL, K. GELLYNCK, E. VAN NIMMEN, L. VAN LANGENHOVE and J. MERTENS, J. Arachnol. 33 (2005) 549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.D. DE BAKKER, K. GELLYNCK, E. VAN NIMMEN, J. MERTENS and P. KIEKENS, In European Arachnology, edited by F. Samu and Cs. Szinetar (Budapest, Szombathely: Plant Protection Institute & Berzsenyi College, 2002) p. 356Google Scholar
- 29.T. ARAI, G. FREDDI, R. INOCENTI and M. TSUKADA, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 91 (2003) 2383CrossRefGoogle Scholar